Clean air zones

[simsini]

Folks, we are teetering on the edge of political chat here. The thread is a good one, it would be a shame to close it but we will if necessary.

Fair enough, although it's difficult to talk about clean air zones without being political as their introduction is purely political.

 

[Bunkermagnet]

Completely agree about LTNs, they are a joke.

How can you ban cars from taking kids to school when governments of all colours have deliberately stopped children being automatically admitted to their local school? For secondary schools in Kent, you could be allocated one up to 20 miles away with no public transport available. I'm sure the same applies elsewhere.

I alluding to parents who have young children compaining about the air quality yet drive them to school/nursery and just add to the congestion. I know it's what some have to do, but how many have to and just choose to because of lazyness?

 

[Deleted member 21784]

I alluding to parents who have young children compaining about the air quality yet drive them to school/nursery and just add to the congestion. I know it's what some have to do, but how many have to and just choose to because of lazyness?

It really depends

We walk ours to school / nursery but that's because it's that close.

My parents if they pick them up on other hand will drive because it's 2 miles to there house . It's simply too far for little ones to walk.

We have in past picked up the twins from nursery in the car because of going somewhere else afters which is different because Ur dropping off then going

Like a lot of parents now.. 2 parents have to work. As opposed to stay at home parents, so most people are dropping their kids to school then going to work.

I'll add to this now there are more people so you don't get you first choice of school anymore, so you sometimes have to go very far . We don't we are lucky others in her year travel 2-3 miles

 

[TimShady]

ULEZ is an abomination and a disgrace, but also an excuse for Khan to introduce a camera network to turn London into a surveillance state. The cameras are not standard ANPR cameras, they are capable of facial recognition. Why? It will soon be changed into pay per mile as TFL documents already show. He's not spending hundreds of millions for nothing.

Here comes the tinfoil hat brigade. What next… covid denial? Flat earth? Didn’t land on the moon? Exciting.

 

[simsini]

Here comes the tinfoil hat brigade. What next… covid denial? Flat earth? Didn’t land on the moon? Exciting.

Eh? https://www.carwow.co.uk/news/6709/pay-per-mile-road-charging-considered-in-london

 

[TimShady]

Eh? It's here in black and white. https://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2023-02/Road User Charging - Call for Evidence _0.pdf

You’re worried about 15 minute cities, aren’t you?

 

[simsini]

You’re worried about 15 minute cities, aren’t you?

Why are you changing the subject?

 

[Deleted member 21784]

Eh? https://www.carwow.co.uk/news/6709/pay-per-mile-road-charging-considered-in-london

It's already been denied However it's coming down nationwide before too long to replace fuel duty

 

[simsini]

It's already been denied However it's coming down nationwide before too long to replace fuel duty

Of course it is, and it should be resisted at every opportunity.

 

[Deleted member 21784]

Of course it is, and it should be resisted at every opportunity.

If it's replacing fuel duty does it matter? That is literally a pay by mile service

 

[simsini]

If it's replacing fuel duty does it matter? That is literally a pay by mile service

It matters for a few reasons. How will pay per mile be calculated? As with any new scheme, it's always designed to raise more revenue than the last. Will the government be tracking your every move? Fuel duty charges the same per litre regardless of how much you use. Will pay per mile cost you more and more proportionately if you drive more, or at certain times of day?

 

[Deleted member 21784]

It matters for a few reasons. How will pay per mile be calculated? As with any new scheme, it's always designed to raise more revenue than the last. Will the government be tracking your every move? Fuel duty charges the same per litre regardless of how much you use. Will pay per mile cost you more and more proportionately if you drive more, or at certain times of day?

Nothing wrong with any of that

If your worried about the gov tracking you put your phone in the bin

 

[Lord Tyrion]

Fair enough, although it's difficult to talk about clean air zones without being political as their introduction is purely political.

Unfortunately political discussions are against the rules of the forum. There can be a general discussion about clean air zones, so far, so good on the whole, but once it starts veering to a political chat we will need to take action.

Vent your spleen elsewhere is the answer

 

[Jamesbrown]

Had to google ULEZ to see what it was

If over and above all the exemptions & discounts I see listed, the tflgov website says "Nearly all petrol vehicles produced since 2005 meet the ULEZ standards"... is anyone actually gonna need to pay the charge ?

Not yet no but as it fades into the background they’ll change what is exempt.
Sounds alright and dressed it nice for acceptance.
But once taxes are in, they don’t go away even if the air was pure and exhausts kicked out pretty bubbles.

 

[Deleted member 21784]

It started with the congestion charge, which did reduce emissions. Because they at first did if your car produces under 100mg of co2 your free. All the private hire became hybrids

Then they changed it to slightly lower

Now i know my EV is currently free. And a lot of private hires have become the mg5 .. everywhere in London now but from 2025 they become chargeable.. now if anyone wants to look at a stealth tax there you go.

Ulez won't change for decades. But they will change other things. So all these EV private hire will have to pay whatever congestion charge is but won't have to pay ulez . And eventually ulez will become for all emission cars in London by 2050

However by then emission cars will be 20 years old anyways so won't be as much of an issue

 

[backwoodsman]

And this thread, like many others, just demonstrates why we are peeing into to the wind about so many serious health & climate issues.

'Oh I'm all for improving things - along as it doesn't affect me or anything I want to do ...' And if I don‘t like it, I'll blame it on corruption and/or money.

 

[Deleted member 21784]

And this thread, like many others, just demonstrates why we are peeing into to the wind about so many serious health & climate issues.

'Oh I'm all for improving things - along as it doesn't affect me or anything I want to do ...' And if I don‘t like it, I'll blame it on corruption and/or money.

Well blooming said.

This is small fry change tbh and look at the toys out the pram. Imagine if we all grew up and had to do real climate change action?

I mean ulez should be ban all classic cars

In 10 years all current cars not allowed should be banned aswell

By 2040 all zero emissions only cars should be free other than that you should pay ulez

Changing and improving air quality is a real step towards action for climate change

But nobody is willing to do it

Yes we need help from above and not cost all on the normal person but that's another thread

 

[cliveb]

Air quality in London has improved in the last few years, but attributing it to ULEZ is wishful thinking on the part of those with a vested interest. Independent analysis by Imperial College suggests otherwise:

Dr Marc Stettler, from Imperial's Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Centre for Transport Studies, said: "Our research suggests that a ULEZ on its own is not an effective strategy to improve air quality".

A full report on their research was published in Environmental Research Letters, which is a peer-reviewed journal:

Abstract
London introduced the world's most stringent emissions zone, the Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ), in April 2019 to reduce air pollutant emissions from road transport and accelerate compliance with the EU air quality standards. Combining meteorological normalisation, change point detection, and a regression discontinuity design with time as the forcing variable, we provide an ex-post causal analysis of air quality improvements attributable to the London ULEZ. We observe that the ULEZ caused only small improvements in air quality in the context of a longer-term downward trend in London's air pollution levels. Structural changes in nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and ozone (O3) concentrations were detected at 70% and 24% of the (roadside and background) monitoring sites and amongst the sites that showed a response, the relative changes in air pollution ranged from −9% to 6% for NO2, −5% to 4% for O3, and −6% to 4% for particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than 2.5 μm (PM2.5). Aggregating the responses across London, we find an average reduction of less than 3% for NO2 concentrations, and insignificant effects on O3 and PM2.5 concentrations. As other cities consider implementing similar schemes, this study implies that the ULEZ on its own is not an effective strategy in the sense that the marginal causal effects were small. On the other hand, the ULEZ is one of many policies implemented to tackle air pollution in London, and in combination these have led to improvements in air quality that are clearly observable. Thus, reducing air pollution requires a multi-faceted set of policies that aim to reduce emissions across sectors with coordination among local, regional and national government.

When those with an axe to grind declare that ULEZ is responsible for the improved air quality, they are missing the bigger picture. It's similar to declaring that installing speed cameras causes a reduction in RTAs, being unaware of a basic statistical tendency called "regression to the mean". They are both examples of assuming cause and effect where any such connection is tenuous at best.

 

[clubchamp98]

But it's not. If they wanted to make money they would of just expanded the congestion charge zone. They didn't cause they don't. They don't want you to to have to pay £12.50. They don't want you getting in your car in the first place.

It may be unpopular but it is 100% the right thing to do. I'd equate it to the smoking ban. The world was going to end cause they banned smoking in pubs - not I can't imagine anything worse on a night out than being stuck in a smoky pub.

So why do they let you bring your polluting car into the zone as long as you pay the charge.?

It would make sense if they banned them Like they did with smoking
But as long as you pay you can come in, that’s not about air quality!

 

[backwoodsman]

So why do they let you bring your polluting car into the zone as long as you pay the charge.?

It would make sense if they banned them Like they did with smoking
But as long as you pay you can come in, that’s not about air quality!

Whether it makes more or less sense to impose an outright ban, I don't know. But the GLA can't impose a ban because it has no legal authority to impose one. I guess that's (one of the reasons) why they haven't.